1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 6, 2015, at around 20:30, the Plaintiff driven a B-hand car at the entrance of the ELki ground located in the elg of Gwangju City, while under the influence of alcohol at 0.147% of alcohol level.

B. On January 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) applied Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the foregoing drunk driving; and (b) revoked the Plaintiff’s Class 1 driver’s license (license number: C) on February 16, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, No. 1 to 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful in light of various circumstances, including the following: (a) the Plaintiff, while operating a wholesale business that supplies by-products collected from D’s factory to feed for each farm; (b) the Plaintiff, while carrying out the delivery business alone, must obtain a driver’s license; (c) the Plaintiff’s driving is against the Plaintiff’s depth; and (d) the Plaintiff has no record of driving under the influence of alcohol.

B. Even if the revocation of the driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is an administrative agency's discretionary action, in light of today's mass means of transportation and the situation where the driver's license is issued in large quantities, the increase of traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and the suspicion of its result, etc., the need for public interest should be emphasized to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and when the driver's license is revoked on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of the revocation of the driver's license on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of the revocation of the ordinary beneficial administrative action, the general preventive aspect should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Du1048, Mar. 27, 1998; 2012Du1051, May 24, 2012). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, we examine and examine the instant case.